Court Observes No Compelling Reasons to Deny Bail; Co-accused with Identical Charges Already Granted Bail; Trial Ongoing with Investigation Complete
In a significant judgment delivered on September 11, 2026, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided over by Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal, granted regular bail to Neeraj Kumar, the petitioner accused in a high-profile CSIR-UGC NET examination paper leak case. The case pertains to the alleged fraudulent leaking of examination question papers scheduled for December 18, 2025, involving a syndicate that reportedly charged Rs. 3-4 lakhs per student for access to the leaked papers.
Neeraj Kumar was arrested on December 17, 2025, following a police operation at Narwal Kabaddi Academy, Sonipat, where the accused were caught distributing leaked question papers to students. Investigations revealed that the petitioner, along with co-accused, including Sachin, his brother Dheeraj, and associates Pawan and Ashish, conspired to leak the papers through digital means-receiving the papers on mobile phones and printing them for distribution. Police recovered laptops, printers, multiple mobile phones, and two sets of question papers for Chemistry and Life Sciences from the accused and students.
The petitioner had been in custody for over 10 months, with the trial underway and the investigation reported as complete. The petitioner's counsel highlighted that the co-accused Sachin, facing identical allegations, had already been granted bail by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sonipat, in March 2026. Further, the paper recovered during the investigation did not match the actual question paper used in the examination. The petitioner has no prior criminal record and has complied with all legal processes.
The State opposed the bail plea, emphasizing the serious nature of the crime, which undermines the integrity of public examinations and affects society at large. The State pointed to the recovery of incriminating evidence and the petitioner's central role in the alleged syndicate.
The Court, while acknowledging the seriousness of the offense, reiterated the fundamental principle that the deprivation of liberty must be justified by compelling reasons. The Court noted that bail is not a punitive measure but is intended to ensure the accused's presence during trial. Given the co-accused's bail status, the petitioner's clean antecedents, fixed residence in Village Karotha, Sonipat, and the lack of evidence suggesting he would flee or tamper with witnesses, the Court found no grounds to continue his detention.
The Court granted bail subject to the petitioner furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court or duty magistrate. The judgment underscores the delicate balance courts must maintain between safeguarding society's interests and protecting the fundamental rights of the accused during criminal proceedings.
This case highlights the judiciary's role in upholding the presumption of innocence and ensuring fair trial rights even in cases involving serious allegations like examination paper leaks, which have far-reaching implications for the education system and public trust.
Bottom Line:
Bail - Principles governing the grant of bail - Accused should not be deprived of liberty unless there are compelling reasons to believe they would not be available for trial - Co-accused granted bail with identical allegations is a relevant consideration.
Statutory provision(s):
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Sections 316(2), 318(4), 61(2), 238(B); Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 Sections 10, 11
Neeraj Kumar v. State of Haryana, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2979255
